Our Man In Afghanistan

Andrew Exum reacts to the leak that Ambassador Karl Eikenberry is skeptical of escalation in Afghanistan:

Last week Michael Semple bluntly stated
that the most important dynamic in Afghanistan was the relationship
between the "international community" (for which we should read, he
said: "United States of America") and the government of Afghanistan.
Well how is that going to work now? It's now common knowledge that Karl
Eikenberry -- the U.S. ambassador -- thinks you, Hamid Karzai, lead a
collection of corrupt and ineffective goons unworthy of further U.S.
investment! Whoever leaked these classified cables has cut the knees
out from underneath the most important U.S. representative in Kabul!

All of this is to say that Karl Eikenberry -- whatever you think of
the man -- got royally screwed by some short-sighted jerks in the 202
area code. The cables had already been deliberated upon by the
president and his advisors, but that wasn't enough, so some idiots
decided to also make the cables public knowledge. Now whatever U.S.
policy goes forward -- counterinsurgency, counter-terror, withdrawal,
rape and pillage, whatever -- is going to suffer for the soured
relationship between our man in Kabul and the government of Afghanistan.

Ackerman writes up this mornings Afghanistan White House meeting from the perspective of an anti-Eikenberry staffer:

No one was happy to read in The Washington Post
that Eikenberry, who commanded the war himself from 2005 to 2007,
thinks that the Karzai government needs to demonstrate its commitment
to anti-corruption measures before the administration can responsibly
authorize another troop increase. The prevailing theory is that “he
leaked his own cables” because “he has a beef with McChrystal,” the
staffer said. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, Eikenberry’s successor as NATO
commander in Afghanistan, has requested an increase in troops to
support a counterinsurgency strategy with a substantial counterterrorism component.